Robert Fisher

(...in progress...)

“I further posit that the decision of what to codify with resolution mechanics and what to leave fuzzy is not based on some logical analysis of mediating factors, but on what the designers think is fun to roll dice for, and what they think is fun to improvise.” —Fute

“The rules were written with an ‘Everything not forbidden is permitted’ attitude.” —Mike Mornard

“What I think isn’t important. It is what your DM decides that is.” —Gary Gygax

“Why, we wondered, did people want questions answered when making up the answers was the fun part of the game? Why did people not want to have fun?” —Mike Mornard

“The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don’t need any rules.” —Gary Gygax

“But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.” —Romans 7:6 (NIV)

“He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.” —2 Corinthians 3:6 (NIV)

I have a feeling that one—if not the—defining element of role-playing games is the role of the judge as a living rulebook. Or, perhaps more generally, a negotiation of the rules by the group with—usually—the judge being given the honor of having the final say in return for taking on the task of judge.

Some people like to compare this to Fizzbin or Calvinball.

To be clear: When I speak of role-playing games—or RPGs—herein, I refer to conventional, tabletop, pencil & paper games such as Dungeons & Dragons, Traveller, et al.

Fizzbin

In the Star Trek episode, “A Piece of the Action”, Captain Kirk invents a card game called Fizzbin to distract guards holding him & his officers hostage.

The crucial difference, of course, is that Kirk’s purpose here is completely different from that on an RPG judge. The judge isn’t trying to distract the players—at least not in the same sense of the word distract.

There are, however, some similarities. Kirk has to create, ad hoc, rules that his audience could believe are an actual game to hold the guards’ interest. (Although the writer can’t make the rules too believable because he must draw the TV audience in on the joke.) His game, however, doesn’t have to fool a tenured professor of ludology. Only some alien thugs.

The RPG judge, likewise, must make judgments that seem plausible to the players in the context of the game. They don’t have to be perfect. Just good enough for the players at the table. The RPG judge, however, has a huge advantage over Kirk: The players are in on the joke! The judge can allow the players to help him make better judgments. Better being whatever works for the group.

Calvinball

In the Bill Watterson comic strip Calvin and Hobbes, the eponymous protagonist play a game known as Calvinball. It serves as a foil to the organized sports adults teach to kids. It represents the playground game kids play on their own.

The crucial difference between Calvinball & RPGs is that the only constant rule of Calvinball is that it cannot be played the same way twice. RPGs have no such imperative. Calvinball is also obviously much closer to LARP in mode of play than tabletop, pencil & paper RPGs.

(...about thinking outside the box &—in doing so—to expand the box...)

(...a simple rule provides the structure—however minimal—that guides the game...)

(...all participants invited to play the metagame...)

(...sum up...)

(^_^)

---

Back to Classic D&D & other RPG musings

last updated 2 months ago #